stress sweat is different than ordinary sweat. it smells worse. get 4x the protection against stress sweat. introducing new secret clinical strength stress response scent. i just served my mother-in-law your chicken noodle soup but she loved it so much... i told her it was homemade. everyone tells a little white lie now and then. but now she wants my recipe [ clears his throat ] [ softly ] she's right behind me isn't she? [ male announcer ] progresso. you gotta taste this soup. ♪ good morning from new york. i'm chris hayes. the obama justice department filed a brief last night with the united states supreme court urging justices to strike down the defense of marriage act which the court will rule on later this year. we're going to be talking about

mother supreme court case in just a second. and the president announced last night that american troops have been sent to build a new base there. right now i'm joining by "the nation" magazine editor. conservatives take aim at voting rights. ryan haygood a member of the litigation team arguing shelby v. holder before the supreme court this week. and bishop harry jones, a pastor at the mount mariah baptist church in colorado and in support of the voting rights act. in 1965, over a century of the emancipation proclamation, signed into law, people of color with their exercise of the right

to vote. the heart of the voting ryes action is section five which subjects any voting changes in the south and some other covered jurisdictions with a history of racial discrimination to a process known as preclearance. meaning these states must first clear any changes that affect the justice department or the federal court to make sure they don't have a racially biased fact. when the supreme court hears shelby versus holder that essentially says things have changed in the south. it's now antiquated, unnecessary and therefore unconstitutional. undeniably, the south say different place today than it was in 1965. and yet not one african-american has been elected to state office in mississippi, louisiana or south carolina. in the last few months states covered under section five and not covered have shut down voting. the i.d. laws, last october, a

panel of federal judges blocked south carolina's proposed voter i.d. law from taking effect. and john bates wrote one cannot doubt the vital function that section five of the voting rights act has played here. the supreme court under roberts has hinted that has run its course. president obama approved a local exemption in section five. and in the oral arguments justice robert questions if section five is necessary and why it burdened separate jurisdictions differently. >> so is it your position that today southerner, more likely to discriminate than northerners? >> i wouldn't frame it in that way, chief justice robert. >> so your answer is yes? >> i think it's fair to say that the pattern has been more repetitious violations in the covered jurisdictions and more one off discrimination in other places. >> well, it's remarkable that

the case before the court is at its outcome more or less hinges on the u.s. supreme court. five justices deciding whether or not to strike down and reauthorized four times by massive overwhelming parties of congress and presidents of -- well, only republican presidents. because of whether the court decides the south is no longer racist. it's great to have you all here. i think this case, we've covered a bit on the network. but i think you cannot overstate the importance of the case. it's probably one of the biggest cases the court has had in a long time. and bishop, i want to begin with you. thank you for traveling up here in new york from shelby county, alabama. one of my best friends lives in alabama. i love the state of alabama. i want to go to you first. because the basic argument here when you clear away the constitutional arguments being made, the legal arguments, part of what's so strange about the case is it's going to come down to a determination of a basic sociological fact which is how

imbedded is racism in areas that are covered? how much is this law still justified by the fact that there is still the wielding of power and the instant towards exclusion on the part of people that wield power in the south in this long history. so my question to you is, what's your sense of that? what would be your answer be in you could talk to the justice of what it's like in shelby what would you tell them? >> i would definitely assure them that racism is still alive. it hasn't gone anywhere. i think racism has taken a different face. in the earlier days it was blatant. i mean, they didn't hide it. now, it's kind of concealed. it travels in a different vehicle now. and so, i've lived in alabama all of my life. and i'm kind of a bloodhound when it comes down to racism. i sniff it out, you know. and it is still alive. and i think that sometimes we paint a picture on the surface, but i think that being a

resident of shelby county i look beneath the surface. >> so, i mean, the bloodhound metaphor is great, right? because the weird thing is we're going to unleash these nine justices sniffing this out. not from shelby county, not from the covered jurisdictions. so how would you convince me, how would you convince chief justice roberts or justice kennedy, that things will go very badly if they strike this down? >> well, i mean, you know, we've already seen some things. we've had one of our councilmen, mr. earnest montgomery, because of the way the district was divided, lost the election. even on top of that when the d.o.j. told them or advised them not to have the election, they went on with the election anyway. >> this is a black elected member of the city council, is that right? >> that's correct. because of that, he lost his seat. d.o.j. came back -- you know, deemed it, i guess,

unconstitutional. and they had to redo. and they had an at-large vote and he was the top vote-getter. it was designed to dilute the black community. >> is this what this case ultimately rests on? perfect for this, i've worked in the court. i've spent some time in the court. how fact down this case seems. it really seems like the court is going to make some determination about this basically sociological fact about the covered jurisdictions which is how much racism is there? how imbedded are these practices? it seems a strange thing for the court to be doing? >> it is a strange thing, chris. what's interesting congress asked all these questions about whether or not racial discrimination is prevalent in the covered jurisdictions. they analyzed looking at the covered jurisdictions versus the uncovered. i know there's rhetoric that he didn't do that. but they did. and congress looked at it.

>> 21 hearings. >> yeah, right. it's sortch this huge process, exactly what congress is supposed to do. i think what you're getting at, the court defined the parameters how the court can act. i guess for the '90s said, look, here's the work where you can act. here's unconstitutional conduct and you can act in this world. >> right. >> and they actually held up the voting rights authorization for '92 as the gold standard for how congress should act. and congress acted in that way in this instance, so what's the problem. >> how do we lose? >> can i just say, it's not racism like it was in 1965, the george wallaces of the world are gone. but it's political racism, in the sense, luke in the south. the southern gop is 88% white. the southern democratic party is 50% white, 56% african-americans and the rest are minority groups.

when they're growing in the south are aligning themselves in the democratic party, the gop is passing voter suppression laws in response to that. it doesn't matter if it's outright racism it has the same effect. >> i think it pushed back for a second, not completely, but i actually think the power of the section five is not on the national level. or not the congressional level. it's important there what we just heard about what's happening in clara and shelby county, we're talking about water districts. county commissions. police juries, local stuff where party doesn't matter. it's not partisan. >> i think it's important to take away from what patrick jones said, manifested in places covered by sections five is synonymous with the original discrimination we saw in 1965. this is really part of what dates back to the beginning in alabama? >> what do you mean by that? >> the city of calera, in 2008,

submitted by the city of calera that sought to eliminate the sole african-american district by reducing the black population from 70% to 29%. >> right. >> though the department of justice rejected it as discriminatory, his redistricting plan, the city of calera never held an election which the sole city councilman who is also a party in this case lost his seat. this is after the d.o.j. rejects the plan. thankfully, under section five, the department of justice required the city to redraw the ballots in a nondiscriminatory way and hold another election in which we saw the african-americans, because of the votes of the african-americans in that district in calera regain his seat. and this practice is exactly what voters in alabama saw when the voting rights act was passed in 1965. >> an iconic example of this is

kilmichael, mississippi. the consensus, the town has a population of 830 of whom 52.4% are black. currently the mayor and all five board members are white. on may 15th, 2001, with no notice to the community, the board unanimously voted to cancel the general election. first the decision toe cancel came only a majority of the registered voters and the release of census data indicated that black persons were now a majority of the town. >> you see this all the time. weird changes being promoted just when the latino or african-american community is able to realize some electoral power. >> i want to talk what the numbers look like. and the argument that people in favor of striking down section five are making which is basically the act should be a victim of its own success. the fact that the numbers are

good enough. >> one very important point that needs to be brought to the table, also, as mr. managemenon he served there. you have other councilman aware of the fact that the d.o.j. canceled the election. >> right. >> and owl of the councilmen knew except mr. montgomery who was the black councilman. he didn't even find out about it until after, you know, the election. >> this is a little -- but i want to talk more about that right after we take a quick break. ender, and you'll dump your old duster. but don't worry, he'll find someone else. ♪ who's that lady? ♪ who's that lady? ♪ sexy lady, who's that lady? [ female announcer ] swiffer 360 dusters extender cleans high and low, with thick all around fibers that attract and lock up to two times more dust than a feather duster. swiffer gives cleaning a whole new meaning. and now swiffer dusters refills are available with the fresh scent of gain.

and ♪ a flavor paradisensefills aof delicious fishes ♪♪ ♪ friskies seafood sensations. ♪ ♪ feed the senses. what do we do when something really wants to be painted? we break out new behr ultra with stain-blocker from the home depot... ...the best selling paint and primer in one that now eliminates stains. so it paints over stained surfaces, scuffed surfaces, just about any surface. what do you say we go where no paint has gone before, and end up some place beautiful. more saving. more doing. that's the power of the home depot. behr ultra. now with advanced stain blocking, only at the home depot, and only $31.98 a gallon. all stations come over to mithis is for real this time. step seven point two one two. verify and lock. command is locked. five seconds. three, two, one.

standing by for capture. the most innovative software on the planet... dragon is captured. is connecting today's leading companies to places beyond it. siemens. answers. did you know not all fiber is the same? citrucel is different- it's the only fiber for regularity that won't cause excess gas. it's gentle and clinically proven to help restore and maintain regularity. look for citrucel today.

all right. so from 2010 to 2011, the justice department objected to only 29 of nearly 20,000 proposed voting changes. now, so one level, you can say actually this isn't imposing a

huge burden. this isn't an overreach. but i think people who think the law should no longer be in effect think, looking the problem is solveds right? >> right. >> why do you want to keep insulting the sovereign dignity of the great state of alabama if it turns out that -- what is that, 99 percent are getting -- >> the number, chris, has always been less than one percent of the number of those changes that are objected to. so the number has always been small, but the actual -- each objection protects many, many, many voters. so, for example in the state of texas, for example, we recently saw the department of justice rejected texas' photo i.d. and they litigated that in the court. and 3,000 people did have the i.d. that texas were requiring. 70,000 of whom were people of color. each objection protects many, many voters and the number of objections has been small. >> i want to bring in horace

cooper, co-chair of the project 21 national advisory board that filed an amicus brief to strike down section five. horace, what is interesting here, the voting rights act in an american political landscape that's remarkably polarized is incredibly unanimously or near unanimously supported. the margin, it's been reauthorized three times. a huge margin, 98 to zero. i want to play a little sound from three republican presidents who signed reauthorization of the law. take a listen. >> there must be no question whatsoever about the right of each eligible american, each eligible citizen, to participate in our elective process. the extension of this act will help to ensure that right. >> the right to vote is the crohn jewel of american liberties, and we will not see its luster diminished. >> today, we renew a bill that

helped bring a community on the margins into the life of american democracy. my administration will vigorously enforce the provisions of this law and we will defend it in court. >> and my question to you, horace, given this bipartisan support, given the extensive congressional record, given all of this, shouldn't there be a lot of deference afforded to congress for determination? why should we be overturning something that has such broad support in the american public? >> well, naturally, of course, the supreme court will give a great deof deferengree of defere president and as they should. that's the natural progress but the discussion that's occurred this morning is failing to appreciate that there are certain legal principles that are at stake. the supreme court is not going

to be making a diagnosis of whether or not the south has made progress in terms of racial line or not. they're going to be addressing specific, factual issues. and the legal arguments that are associated with those. much of that has been left in this morning's conversation. >> you're right. let me read from you the last time that the court talked about this issue, with the north austin municipal district. chief justice roberts saying more than 40 years ago, the court concluded that exceptional conditions prevailing in certain parts of the country justified extraordinary legislation otherwise unfamiliar to coveredle jurisdiction. in part due to the success of that legislation, we are now a very different nation. whether conditions continue to justify such legislation is a difficult constitutional question we do not answer today." the test that the chief justice himself enunciates in that

section of his previous opinion is about whether the conditions continue to justify such legislation. the conditions are a matter of fact. and so the court is going to be mitigating a factual determination about these conditions, isn't it? >> i'm sorry, you're looking at the rhetoric portion of the ruling and assuming that's going to be the basis for the actual determination. and the fact of the matter is, that the actual serious constitutional challenge of separating some states out and treating them one way challenges the notion of state sovereignty. and equal -- >> it is sovereignty -- sorry. >> it's a serious issue that has to be addressed. >> in oral arguments justice kennedy enunciated this the best. >> i think senator kennedy is looking seriously at the

question of whether or not he thinks what congress did in 2006 was within that circle. that i talked about a minute ago. of where congress is allowed to act to stop on constitutional conduct. he's looking at that question. i think the evidence that the ryan was talking about, the pastor was talking has been answers get. >> in 2006, this was before the congress, they found section five, 25% of the u.s. population. but they accounted for 52% of violations of other parts of the voting rights act. you look at the 2012 election, states covered in full by section five, two-thirds of them passed voting restrictions compared to one-third of the noncovered jurisdictions. there isn't there isn't a power in ohio or michigan. the power is still worse in places like alabama and mississippi. >> horace, more of this question, it's sort of the core of this case, right after we take this break. see that's much better! that was good.

you had your shoulder pointed, you kept your eyes on your target. let's do it again -- watch me. just like that one... [ male announcer ] the durability of the volkswagen passat. pass down something he will be grateful for. good arm. that's the power of german engineering. ♪ back to you. ♪ i don't wanna be right [ record scratch ] what?! it's not bad for you. it just tastes that way. [ female announcer ] honey nut cheerios cereal -- heart-healthy, whole grain oats. you can't go wrong loving it.

i've been using crest pro-health for a week. my dentist said it was gonna help transform my mouth. [ male announcer ] go pro. for a clean that's up to four times better, try these crest pro-health products together. [ sara ] i've been using crest pro-health. so far...it feels different. [ male announcer ] crest pro-health protects not just some, but all these areas dentists check most. my mouth feels healthier. it feels cleaner. i think my dentist is gonna see the difference. [ male announcer ] go pro with crest pro-health. i don't think i'll ever go back to another product. see.

from capital one... boris earns unlimited rewards for his small business. can i get the smith contract, please? thank you. that's three new paper shredders. [ boris ] put 'em on my spark card. [ garth ] boris' small business earns 2% cash back on every purchase every day. great businesses deserve unlimited rewards. read back the chicken's testimony, please. "buk, buk, bukka!" [ male announcer ] get the spark business card from capital one and earn unlimited rewards. choose 2% cash back or double miles on every purchase every day. told you i'd get half. what's in your wallet? told you i'd get half. i've always kept my eye on her... but with so much health care noise, i didn't always watch out for myself. with unitedhealthcare, i get personalized information and rewards for addressing my health risks. but she's still going to give me a heart attack. that's health in numbers. unitedhealthcare.

so horace, you raised the state sovereignty question. i don't think it's disputed that the voting rights act is kind of a novel approach to dealing with different states and the notion of covered jurisdictions. and one of the arguments of folks who want to strike down section five have made is that this differentiation of sovereignty. and people who say that's justified by the differential conditions. my question to you, it seems like a strangely perverse agent to say discrimination is happening in places like michigan and ohio. and therefore, we should get rid of the stuff that's working in the other places. and the second question is, would you be okay with a voting rights act that extended to the whole country if that's the constitutional principle is the thing that you think is threatened by the current makeup. law. >> let's take that latter question first. a statute that covered the

entire state would have less constitutional hurdles to clear and would make a better policy. it is a second problem, however, that has led to the situation of the litigation today. it is the enforcement in the name of preclearance standard that is the subject of the problem. if we were struck with or saddled with or given circumstances of the straightforward evidences of discrimination, you wouldn't see an argument like the one in that shelby county is making succeed. the problem has become that the justice department is becoming much more interested in racism prevention than racism punishment. the police officer goes to the bank and arrests the guy who robs the bank. he doesn't go to the bank and set up standards to prevent bank robberies. the police officer also doesn't get to decide are there more bank robberies happening now or less bank robberies happening?

he simply enforces the lot. my final point is, the justice department has decided that the number of black elected officials is a proxy for the degree of racism or not that's going on. that's an uninterested premise. and that is the reason why, when you are addressing the sovereignty issue, you can't take untested premises and use them to offset the sovereignty of everybody. >> the whole point of section five was to be preemptive. what was happening before 1965, the courts would strike down suppression laws. and a new suppression law would go in effect. what section five did was the beauty of shifting that burden. the other burden, it's been targeted. that's why it's been upheld. it's supposed to be narrow and deep. >> just as kennedy in the oral argument that we called the mud case in the northwest austin case. he said, i know section five is effective.

i know section five works. and i know the other parts of the voting rights act are not a substitute for it. so the whole idea that this is a bad mechanism is spurious. >> and ledo suggested as much. and horace said that's problematic. >> the genius of what it did, it surveyed it across the country to ari's earlier point. to the areas that the voters were most concentrated. the places where discrimination was the most intense, most adaptive, most persistent was the existing covered jurisdictions in section five. there is a record in congress which spans 15,000 pages. curiously horace's brief submitted doesn't grapple with at all which justifies congress's continued coverage of

the existing coverage understand section five. >> he should run for office and see if he can win and i think that none of the things that we have to also look at the fact if that section five has been the one thing that has leveled the playing field. you know, and i think if had it not been for section five, and i'm not so much concerned about what's going on right now, i'm concerned about what will happen if section five is lifted. >> can i ask you that question, horace? i think you would agree -- i don't know where you stand on this, that the voting rights at some point has been justified and a successful piece of legislation, right? >> i don't disagree with that. but i disagree with the idea that the bishop just pointed out that the test is how many are the given race are successful. >> that's thought what he's saying. >> that is what the justice department has been pursuing. >> no, no. >> and in fact, the justice department, when they analyze the amount of racism and discrimination, one of their

indices is the lack of elected officials so you can't say that, that's not the argument. >> hold on one second. got to take a quick commercial break. well now i'm her dietitian and last year, she wasn't eating so well. so i recommended boost complete nutritional drink to help her get the nutrition she was missing. and now she drinks it every day. well, it tastes great! [ male announcer ] boost has 26 essential vitamins and minerals, including calcium and vitamin d to support strong bones, and 10 grams of protein to help maintain muscle. and our great taste is guaranteed or your money back. learn more at boost.com [ dietitian ] now, nothing keeps mom from doing what she loves... being my mom. [ dietitian ] now, nothing keeps mom try running four.ning a restaurant is hard, fortunately we've got ink. it gives us 5x the rewards on our internet, phone charges and cable, plus at office supply stores. rewards we put right back into our business.

this is the only thing we've ever wanted to do and ink helps us do it. make your mark with ink from chase.

and you'll dump your old broom. but don't worry, he'll find someone else. ♪ who's that lady? ♪ who's that lady? ♪ sexy lady ♪ who's that lady? [ female announcer ] swiffer sweeper's electrostatic dry cloths attract and lock dirt, dust, and hair on contact to clean 50% more than a broom.

it's a difference you can feel. swiffer gives cleaning a whole new meaning. and now swiffer wet and dry refills are available with the fresh scent of gain. talking about what indices of racial discrimination was used. horace thinks it's problematic to use this basis of how many african-americans were elected. >> the truth the matter, horace's argument is wholly meritless. in alabama and other covered jurisdictions, one expression of people of color's vote is their ability to elect their candidate of choice who at times may look like them in if african-americans. the sought to elect the african-americans the cities are looking to the redistricting plan. and this say significant feature as it acts as our discriminatory

check points for dmauemocracy. >> the focus of the inquiry is always what does the minority community want, latino voters, african-american voters, who's their candidate of choice. that's what we look at. we look to see what do the voters want. this is not some patronizing or some course of black people or latino people. it really looking at actual voting patterns. the thing that's often true in many of the section five jurisdictions, a level that's not true in other places, is that the minority community are trying to elect candidates that the majority community will systematically reject. you have to find a place to have a political voice. >> can i make a point? this is not an grassroots uprising. this is a conservative complex. the same field that were pushing discriminatory voting changes, they want this challenge to happen.

that's why it's before the court. so there's really no constituency for this challenge, other than the biggest names in the conservative parties. >> horace -- >> the thing that what people may be looking at, the fact, it seems as though, they think that we're looking for you to give us something. we're not asking you to give us anything. >> right. >> all we want is the opportunity to make the playing field level. give the opportunity to the citizens to make this thing -- >> horace, are you a constituency less? >> you know, it feels good while we're drinking coffee and having a conversation this morning to make those kind of denounced statements but the truth of the matter is, whether it is lawsuits against the vietnam war, whether it is the right of he to marry men, or women to marry women. whether it is any claim, if we left litigation only to circumstances where it was popular, most of the landmark litigation that we see and we appreciate today would never

take place. >> yeah, but -- >> that's a species standard that is not popular. the point is, there are legal principles that are at work. now, if this justice department would have remembered that the voting rights act was intended to stop the number of fire burnings the number of lynches, the number of shootings, and actual voter discrimination techniques that were occurring, that were predominant in those areas, instead of deciding that a new modern approach is this holistic idea of what does the voting population want, they would be on much stronger ground. >> was the voting -- >> you can be black, white and brown and ask a poll about, say, voter i.d., and you'll see that number in the high 60 ps. every one of your panelists is opposed to voter i.d. >> that's not true. >> the right to be able to carry

it out, it raises those fundamental constitutional questions. >> chris, i would say there's nothing insistent with what congress in 2006 in section five. which is when they looked at the tremendous progress that we've made in this country in democracy in reading the racial discrimination and recognizing the need for more. and section five has occasioned the type of progress we're seeing since 1965. it itself, the strong antibiotic that it is, seeks to continue the work that it began in 1965. the congress developed, showed there were more than 1,000 discriminatory changes that were blocked. and those changes would have gone effect but for section five. section five protects real voters from real discrimination in real places. >> and we're where we are because of section five. you know, the sophomores paint a picture that we're holding hands singing "kumbaya" in the south.

that's not the truth. there are issues to be dealt with. >> if the challenges were successful, if the court were to strike down section five and ten years from now in the bizarre future i still have a television show. and you come back on the program and say the number of black elected officials in the south have dropped 80%. will you view it as a mistake if all the metrics go down? or is the principle here the point? >> the principle is the point, and by the way, once we get to this question of racial voting and that being the test, where does it end? are you going to invalidate the presidential election of 2012 because 90% of blacks, blacks voted for a candidate of their same color? where does that quest stop. you shoot absolutely ought to s with what the law says. >> horace cooper thanks for joining us popd ari berman from the nation magazine.

julie hernandez. and bishop harry jones, a party to the lawsuit supporting voter rights acts. republicans governors put millions of lives on the line. that's next. [ female announcer ] nature valley protein bars, with simple, real ingredients, like roasted peanuts, creamy peanut butter, and a rich dark-chocolate flavor, plus 10 grams of protein, so it's energy straight from nature to you. nature valley protein bars.

i'm here to pick up some cacti. it should be under stephens. the verizon share everything plan for small business. get a shareable pool of data... got enough joshua trees? ... on up to 25 devices. so you can spend less time... yea, the golden barrels... managing wireless costs and technology and more time driving your business potential. looks like we're going to need to order more agaves... ah! oh! ow! ... and more bandages. that's powerful. shareable data plus unlimited talk and text. now save $50 on a droid razr maxx hd by motorola. ♪ i have direct deposit on my visa prepaid. my paycheck is loaded right on my card. automatic. i am not going downtown standing in line to cash it. i know where my money is, because it is in my pocket. i got more time with my daughter, we got places to go.

[ freeman ] go open a new world, with visa prepaid. more people go with visa. it's delicious. so now we've turned her toffee into a business. my goal was to take an idea and make it happen. i'm janet long and i formed my toffee company through legalzoom. i never really thought i would make money doing what i love. [ robert ] we created legalzoom to help people start their business and launch their dreams. go to legalzoom.com today and make your business dream a reality. at legalzoom.com we put the law on your side. except what it's done to my hair, so i'm doing something new. new age defy from pantene. it's a system with pro-vitamins and caffeine. 7 signs of aging hair, like dryness and damage, virtually disappear to make hair act up to 10 years younger. new age defy, including advanced thickening.

winner of an allure best of beauty breakthrough award. pantene expert collection. florida republican governor rick scott announced his support this week for expanding medicare making florida -- yes, i lost my breath because it was so shocking. making florida only the seventh state with a republican governor to opt into the expansion. >> while the federal government is committed to paying 100% of the cost, i cannot in good conscience deny floridians that need access to health care. we will support a three-year expansion of our medicare program under the new health care law.

as long as the federal government meets their commitment to pay 100% of the cost during that time. >> scott's announcement as he seen there in that hostage video is in many way a shocking development because rick scott who once led the country's largest for-profit hospital change has one of the largest proponents of the medicare act. he spent money to lead that. and florida fought the affordable care act only to lose. in june, scott responded to the court's decision upholding the aca. >> it is so disappointing. this is going to be devastating for patients. devastating for taxpayers. it's going to be the biggest job killer ever. we're not going to implement obama care in florida. we're not going to expand medicaid because we're going to do the right thing. >> the practical and moral victory of the affordable care

act would provide coverage to people who would get covered through the medicaid expansion. rick scott aside, 14 have said they will not participate. the medicaid expansion will provide coverage to almost 6 million people in just those working states that have opted out. the implementation of medicaid expansion in the state level is now the front line of the health care battle in this country. will ultimately determine whether the new clauses in the social contract uniformly apply across the country. joining us julia arekoosh and former minute of mitt romney advisory group, author of the apothecary. tia mitchell, tampa bay time, miami tallahassee bureau. and joy reed. great to have you here. tia, you broke this story. what change -- flip-flop say term that gets overused in

politics. but this is a flip-flop. >> this is. and what happened is governor rick scott took the practical -- the words you used, practical, he said, it doesn't make sense for florida to leave 100% federal match on the table. >> but the weird thing about it, he seemed like he just -- that was in the bill back in june when he said it was terrible. it wasn't like he was just rooting around in his desk and saw, oh, they're going to cover 100%. maybe we should get on this. he knew that. >> well, a couple points i want to make. number one, he is not saying florida will, florida should. he's been very careful to say if the legislature does this, this is what i would sign. >> right. >> and that's an important distinction because he's going to get the best of both worlds. he gets to look pragmatic. he's moderating himself. he's running for re-election in about a hour. however, he's not saying he's going to advocate for this or make it more likely it actually

happens in florida. >> that's a really good point. what do you think changed his mind on the politician of it? like i said, he can't be 100% of the fact it's on the federal government? >> i think moderating himself for re-election is a factor. also, he pointed out his mother passed away in november. he said it gave him quote/unquote new perspective about the law, its impacts and the needs of families to have health care. so i mean, i do think some of it was a personal decision. but it's also political and it's also -- you know, the bottom line is money. >> yeah, i'm a little bit less convinced. i feel badly that his mother passed away. what happened in florida, tia well knows this, when the gun industry is not running florida. the insurance industry takes up and run florida. the insurance entities came to the legislature and said you're going to take this money. the hospital industry was first in line. the reason for that, public hospitals will essentially go

bankrupt if this money is not taken. florida has 1.3 million uninsured. >> second highest. >> 12 million of, 995,000, approximately, of those people would not qualify for the exchanges and still have medicaid. >> right. >> so that means these people can come to hospitals, get treated. and when the whole affordable care act passed, hospitals said they will take that to ensure the customers that come to us. >> there was a trade. federal fund for hospitals for people who can't turn away. there's something like $50 billion a year spent by hospitals treating people like that. >> yep. >> and there's a federal fund that reimburses some. >> correct. >> that federal fund was cut by the affordable care act. what the hospitals are looking at if medicaid expansion doesn't happen, we no longer get the funds, but we don't get the

medicaid, and we're screwed both ways. >> exactly. miami hospital, it's treated people that literally face bankruptcy. the hospital lobby came to him and said you've got to take the money because we're using this money. the insurance company came to him and said we want privatization on this. he made a deal with the federal government to put people in hmos. >> i want to show the incoming president of the florida hospital association basically coming to the florida state house. when when he come back, you can take a look at him basically coming to the state house and saying, please, give us the money. [ male announcer ] could've had a v8. 100% vegetable juice, with three of your daily vegetable servings in every little bottle. every signature is unique, and every fingerprint unrepeatable.

at sleep number, we recognize the incredible diversity of human beings, and know that up there with your social security number and your phone number is another important number. your sleep number. so we created the extraordinarily comfortable sleep number experience. it's a collection of innovations designed around a bed with dualair technology that allows you to adjust to the support your body needs - each of your bodies. and you'll only find it at a sleep number store. where right now, during the ultimate sleep number event, queen mattresses start at just $599 . and you can save an astonishing 50% on our innovative sleep number limited edition bed. final days! ends sunday! you won't find your sleep number setting at an ordinary mattress store. you'll find it exclusively at a sleep number store. sleep number. comfort...individualized. ahh, cloudy glasses. you didn't have to come over! easy. hi. cascade kitchen counselor. look! over time, a competing gel can leave cloudy hard water deposits,

but cascade complete pacs help leave glasses sparkling. cascade. love it or your money back.

where there's federal dollars being available for three years fully, 90% for the following term. we believe, you know, that's just too much money on the table. it's $26 billion over ten years. $7 billion in the first three

years for floridians to pass up. >> that's mark robitaille, incoming president for the hospital association testifying before the florida state house. on the medicaid expansion where the government pays 100% of the expansion for the first three years. as a republican health policy, did rick scott do the right thing? >> well, you know, one of the things we talk a lot about in health policy circles, coverage. we're expanding coverage. we're doing this for coverage. there's a lot less emphasis on the quality of coverage. and this is a problem. in florida, for example, for every dollar that a private physician paid for a patient, medicaid pays 44 cents. what this means, a lot of doctors don't take medicaid, because they lose a lot of money caring for medicaid patients. if you can't get seen by a doctor, your cancer doesn't get diagnosed late. your heart condition doesn't get

diagnosed early. it's too late to treat. >> but it's better on what the control group is, right? because they're much better than people that don't have health insurance? >> not necessarily. there are other studies that show otherwise. university of virginia conducted a study with 900,000 surgical patients that showed medical patients have a higher mortality than patients who have no care at all. >> i sense of literature, medicaid actually has relatively good health outcomes. depends on the control group. there's been a lot of different stories. >> there's certainly a lot of debate about it. nobody debates that medicaid is a lot worse than private insurance. there was an option, it depends on the state, to put more people on the exchanges where the quality of coverage would have been better than the medicaid where the quarter of coverage is worse. in terms of operators, it's not obvious that the patients are going to do better? >> do you agree with that? >> i don't. the study that you cite from

virginia has mythological flaws in it, it looked backwards over time, what had happened in the past. i think a much better study and a study much more indicative of what's likely to happen with the expansion, the oregon health insurance. in 2008, oregon created a lottery, anyone who met certain criteria 0 could come into it. and a group were able to get medicaid through that lottery. they followed the group that did get it to the group that didn't. and a year later, they studied what happened. the difference between the two groups were striking. the group that did get the medicate coverage reported both physical health and mental health. >> that's subjective. that's not hard outcome. >> they had much better outcome. 60% better mammogram screening than those who didn't have are insurance. they were more likely to be taking the right prescription

drugs for their current conditions. less medical debt, fewer unpaid bills. so i think when we see in realtime, watching what medicaid does for people it making it a tremendously positive impact. >> we're also going to have a good one going forward. >> the oregon study has not measured actually yet. >> florida is moving towards managed care. it will be privatized and hmr pistorius and insureds controlling the medicaid program in florida. florida is opting out of the exchange. >> florida, the same thing, medicare managed care, they're still play paying at the below the combursment rates so the access to physicians and quality care will be better. >> let me point out a few factual things lighter. medicaid reimbursement rates set for the state. medicaid has tremendous latitude for the states.

they determine eligibility. there's a basic package required. the eligibility, optional benefits package and the reimbursement rate all determine ted state level. it squeezed providers so you have reimbursement rates lower than private insurance. unlike medicate where reimbursement rates get fixed in the federal government. >> by the way, in florida, governor rick scott slashed the compensation that went to public hospitals because he wanted to favor private hospitals. and he has been running this experiment in medicaid managed care. people don't like having the hmo experience. at least to your point, when you compare people who have no insurance at all, those are people getting care in the emergency room, by and large. they're not going for mammograms or screenings. sure, doctors do a good job of treating people in the emergency room, but that doesn't mean that's where you get health. >> given the political economy,

that the hospital is grabbing the dollars which i think is a fair enough way to stay in florida. i'm fascinated what's happening in florida where you are. blue state, republican governor, seems to be leaning towards objecting against the medicare expansion. i want to talk about that right after this break. [ male announr it's mom's smartphone... dad's tablet... lauren's smartphone... or kevin's smartphone... at&t mobile share makes it affordable for the whole family to share data on all their devices. and when you connect a tablet, you save $100. ♪ at&t. rethink possible.

ya. alright, another one just like that. right in the old bucket. good toss! see that's much better! that was good. you had your shoulder pointed, you kept your eyes on your target. let's do it again -- watch me. just like that one... [ male announcer ] the durability of the volkswagen passat. pass down something he will be grateful for. good arm. that's the power of german engineering. ♪ back to you. plays a key role throughout our lives. one a day men's 50+ is a complete multivitamin designed for men's health concerns as we age. it has 7 antioxidants to support cell health. one a day men's 50+.

i work for 47 different companies. well, technically i work for one. that company, the united states postal service® works for thousands of home businesses. because at usps.com® you can pay, print and have your packages picked up for free. i can even drop off free boxes. i wear a lot of hats. well, technically i wear one. the u.s. postal service®, no business too small. bjorn earns unlimited rewards for his small business. take these bags to room 12 please. [ garth ] bjorn's small business earns double miles on every purchase every day. produce delivery. [ bjorn ] just put it on my spark card. [ garth ] why settle for less? ahh, oh! [ garth ] great businesses deserve unlimited rewards. here's your wake up call. [ male announcer ] get the spark business card from capital one and earn unlimited rewards. choose double miles or 2% cash back on every purchase every day. what's in your wallet? [ crows ] now where's the snooze button?

it's healthier, ammonia-free. and with aloe, vitamin e, and coconut oil, my hair looks healthier than before i colored. i switched. you should too, to natural instincts. hello from new york. i'm chris hayes here with valerie arkoosh from the national mission alliance. and joy reid. we're talking about medicaid and the surprising addition with rick scott, the betten noir of the president's health care act. he were passively accept if the state legislature votes for the legislation.

i want to counter that with what's happening in pennsylvania, governor tom corbett there. when it was upheld by the supreme court, there was this surprising decision, right, that's created this that said it was unconstitutional for the affordable care act to be structured in such a way that it didn't expand 138% of the poverty line, right? if they didn't do that, originally, the bill said, you don't get any medicaid. done, right? in a 8-1 decision in the affordable care, the supreme court said that's an unconstitutional overreach which is giving the states the options and we're seeing states come down different way. i think there was a remarkable blitheness dprumg all the quarters that the states would accept. obviously, the dollars, 100% for three years, 90% thereafter. this is jack lew talking to george stephanopoulos basically saying we're going to get there. >> in 1960s when medicaid was

enacted with a much smaller federal share where the state had to actually pay a considerable amount, the state ultimately came in. >> do you think the governors -- >> in 1997, when the child health care program was expanded, the states came in. it's 100% federal. >> and goes down to 90% -- >> goes down to 90% after several years but it's the most generous match in the history of medicaid. the governors are going to answer to they're own people. >> the governors are going to have to answer to their own people. governor corbett in 2014, what is going on there? >> he didn't say no, but he said not at this time. but he didn't put any funding in or appropriate the money to drawdown the federal dollars. it's an interesting situation -- >> that sounds like no to me. >> the pennsylvanians that would

benefit from the medicaid prevention. and it's successful in our state, it seems inconceivable that he would walk away from this money, particularly with a 100% match. if this were money to build roads and bridge, clearly there's something else going on here. >> well, what is the something else? what's with the political economy of florida and pennsylvania, pennsylvania is actually a very old state. 600,000 people. it's a blue state. it has a republican governor, but in national elections, it votes quite reliable. how can you get away with this, i guess? what are the politics that the same hospital association folks aren't going to come and beat down this door? >> right now, the state has in-state senate are republican controlled. at the state level right now having re-elected overwhelmingly president obama in the last election. and i think what's been tough to understand in pennsylvania that governor corbett is really not

sharing his analysis publicly. there's been reports issued with numbers in them, but we have not seen the data on some which of those analyses were based. in fairness, governors do have to make sure they have a balanced budget, particularly the first three year, essentially across the state, nothing. and very importantly, the law's written in such a way that should that federal fund going away, that governors can pull back on the expansion. so this is not a one time forever we're expanding. so they have that flexibility down the road as well. >> i just -- the republican-led legislature in florida has some of the same concerns, i think, especially the florida house which is more conservative. and i talked to several members last week, and they said, you know, we just don't believe the federal government is going to make good on its promises. this is deficit spending. so there are, you know, definitely, conservative talking pointses too why the medicaid expansion doesn't make sense. but the other side is, you have

in florida, millions of uninsured. this would reduce it -- give 1 million people insurance. so there's this kind of two sides that have to be debated out in the session. >> and that clip that you brought up with jack lew, he's right about the incentives. states have the incentives to take the money, because otherwise it goes with other states. but the difference between now and then, why is this more of an issue now versus 1965 or 1997, is that medicaid is now such a large part of state budgets that they're much more sensitive to the issue are they going to be on the hook for this extra medicaid spending down the road. it's 100% the first couple years, 90% at the end. what if it goes to 85%? 80%. that's what states are worried about. >> i will take them at their word. it's amazing how state governments don't tent to lower about long-term costs in 2020. in a whole other variety of fields. >> it's a larger portion of the budget.

>> right. pensions are huge. every governor, republican or democrat is happy to take out pension costs to 2030. >> right. >> other thing right now, lot is in 90% in perpetuity after 2020. there is nothing statutorily in the books right now. >> and then you have scott saying and sounding bogus in not taking the money. and he put out numbers that were actually false that it wouldn't cost money. i don't understand corbett but the governors who got elected in 2010, the tea party governors who have to go up for election in 2014 are by and large taking it. in ohio, michigan, rick snyder. but then the sort of presidential -- potential presidential candidates.

wisconsin, scott walker. louisiana's bobby jindal, south carolina not taking it. the people who have national or political aspirations are not taking it. >> pennsylvania is a different case. they're actually in a weird position because they already had eligibility above the -- it's a less devastating impact in wisconsin in terms of who is not going to be covered. >> and i love what scott walker did in wisconsin. he understands the point i was making before. the way he set up his system was to maximize the degree. >> this is what drives me crazy, the republican act saying the exchanges are going to be better. none of the republicans are setting up exchanges in their state. exchanges are incredibly complicated. if people think they're going to provide health care, why aren't they getting it together to get it going?

>> they don't need to. they have very little latitude to change or design the exchange in a different way than the federal government will. so it's easier to offload that risk on the federal government because if there's anything that goes wrong with the implementation -- obama gets blame -- >> right. >> people will still get covered. >> i really want to jump in on this issue of medicaid patients not getting access. i think the largest expansion of primary care, both physicians and nurses is underrated in this country that we've seen in several decades. in the affordable care act there is money to increase reimbursement for primary care doctors up to the medicare rates. in pennsylvania that means 90% increasing rates for primary care doctors. and community health centers, more being built, with the expectation people going there now even with medicaid will continue to go to places like that. but i think what gets missed in this conversation when a person befalls some catastrophe. they get diagnosed with cancer, they get hit by a bus and they

have to go to the hospital, people who are uninsured have effectively debt that they will be paying off for the rest of their lives. they cannot ever get back from that. and people who have medicaid do not have that problem. >> right. >> it pays the hospital bills and it's not a life-ending, from a financial standpoint, experience for someone to get hit by a bus. they can go to the hospital. they can get better. they can get out without endless debt and go back to work. that's what we want, people who can work and contribute to their communities and take care of their kids and not worry that the next layoff means they're done. >> i thought republicans didn't believe in federal control of people's live. now people are saying, hey, federal government, come in and rub the exchange with my state. this is completely upset down. >> because as i said, the states don't have much latitude. >> but kathleen sebelius said they try to work with it.

>> from a policy standpoint, the latitude that states have to design the exchange structurely is very different. >> i think the other question going forward is how that shapes the politics in medicaid. we've seen the politics in medicare which is fascinating. we've got to do something about medicare. you're cutting medicare. and it's an incredible powerful force in our politics. medicaid is an adjunct, those other people. it's interesting to see how that shapes the politics going forward, operating? as people get brought into the system by expansion it might change the support. there's that old line about programs for the poor are poorer programs, right? the more something is made at which eligibility creeps up in the increase scale, you may see increase in quality, right? >> a lot of misconceptions about who medicaid takes care of. seniors and nursing homes -- one

of the biggest percentages of medicaid dollars. children in pennsylvania, a very significant portion of children get health care through medicaid. pregnant women and people with disabilities. so it is not -- in pennsylvania if you're a full-time working adult and you don't work for someone who offers health insurance, you basically have no way to get health insurance. >> valerie arkoosh of the national commission alliance. tia mitchell and joy reed, thanks for being here. the conservative activist council has invited yours truly to speak. my response as agent that visit. tax refund time is here.

i'm with malcom and kelly who are looking for a great new smartphone. you think you can find one at walmart? maybe. let's go see. alright. let him tell you about sprint. we've got the samsung galaxy s iii on the sprint 4g lte network for just $148! nice! wow. and -- you get a $50 gift card. awesome. we can split it. i don't think so. okay. [ earl ] see for yourself. get a $50 walmart gift card when you buy any samsung smartphone on the sprint 4g lte network. now through march 2nd. walmart.

full of beautiful highlights and lowlights. that's why nice'n easy builds dimension into every shade. so here's a challenge: love the gorgeous dimension of nice'n easy or we'll pay for a salon color. take the salon challenge, from nice'n easy.

my story of the week. conservatives and me. and you. so last week, i was surprised and oddly delighted by something that my friend rachel maddow also picked up on. >> they have invited chris hayes to cpac here this year. chris hayes of msnbc invited to speak on a panel with ralph reed. i don't know if he's going to go, but cool that they asked him. >> yes, the conservative political action conference has invited me to speak this march. specifically invited to be part of the financial "csi" washington, along with andrea burckle, michael barone and ralph reed. i'd be gracing the stage from activists from marco rubio to sarah palin to mitt romney who have used the occasion to flaunt their conservative bona fides.

>> how do you know americans are conservatives, here's why? how come liberals never admit they're liberals? >> i was a severely conservative republican governor. >> we must outsmart the liberals. we must outsmart the stupid people trying to run america. >> keep your change. we'll keep our guns, our god, our prostitution. >> the form letter invitation i received even paid me the slightly odd compliment of calling me one of america's leading conservative voices as in "as one of america's leading conservative voices your participation in cpac 2013 will be critical to our efforts." my initial reaction is of course i'll go. i have a special career, for cpac's willingness to invite someone to speak to the attendees as someone who invites conservatives to sit at our table with leftist, it seems

appropriate to except. but then i remember a pretty gross episode from 2011. that year, the board of the american conservative union which sponsors cpac voted to ban the gay conservative go proud that sponsored the 2012 conference. go proud co-founder chris baron told me one of the first things they did was to send it to cpac. as far as go proud knows, the policy of not being allowed to sponsor the event is still in effect. so, i wrote back to al cardenas who runs the aclu yesterday and asked whether the policy is still in effect. if it isn't, i'm psyched to go, if it is, i'll wait until it changes. go proud is not an organization i share much with ideologically or like all that much. go proud is not really the

point. the point is the principle which is it's not okay to ban organizations for reasons of bigotry. but the aclu does this because there's a powerful constituency with conservatism that may have it that way. a number of conservatives have said to me, the bigots have enough juice, they call the shots. this sums up the whole problem in the republican party, doesn't it? maybe because i'm a squish or in the immortal words of abby hoffman, i always want to find the skepticism of bureaucratic dysfunction. the perils of central plans, reference for central institutions but i feel that the conservatism that the republican party controls is just a name that is given for hierarchy exclusion keeping those people whoever they might be out. this year, cpac will be largely be devoted to brainstorming how

to resurrect good fortunes of conservatism of which those people make up the majority. and they are, as co-founder chris barron pointed out to me exclusive. in the last few months, there has been an absolute avalanche of blogs and magazine cover stories and segments on how to save the republican party. what i want to ask my guests when i get back is, is the republican party even worth saving? how do you keep an older car running like new? you ask a ford customer. when they tell you that you need your oil changed you got to bring it in. if your tires need to be rotated, you have to get that done as well. jackie, tell me why somebody should bring they're car here to the ford dealership for service instead of any one of those other places out there. they are going to take care of my car because this is where it came from. price is right no problem, they make you feel like you're a family. get a synthetic blend oil change, tire rotation and much more, $29.95 after $10.00 rebate. if you take care of your car your car will take care of you.

♪ ♪ no two people have the same financial goals. pnc works with you to understand yours and help plan for your retirement. visit a branch or call now for your personal retirement review. your soups are so awesomely delicious my husband and i can't stop eating 'em! what's...that... on your head? can curlers! tomato basil, potato with bacon... we've got a lot of empty cans. [ male announcer ] progresso. you gotta taste this soup.

it's delicious. so now we've turned her toffee into a business. my goal was to take an idea and make it happen. i'm janet long and i formed my toffee company through legalzoom. i never really thought i would make money doing what i love. [ robert ] we created legalzoom to help people start their business and launch their dreams. go to legalzoom.com today and make your business dream a reality. at legalzoom.com we put the law on your side. if by blessed you mean freaked out about money well we suddenly noticed that everything was getting more expensive so we switched to the bargain detergent but i found myself using three times more than you're supposed to and the clothes still weren't as clean as with tide.

so we're back to tide. they're cuter in clean clothes. thanks honey yeah you suck at folding [ laughs ] [ female announcer ] one cap of tide gives you more cleaning power than 6 caps of the bargain brand. [ woman ] that's my tide, what's yours? joining me now the professor of linguists of columbia university. we have akin roid. and michelle goldberg. and john mitchell, associate editor of "the capitol times" in

wisconsin. >> here's my first question, should liberals have an investment? do liberals have an investment or purchase in the great debate how to rebuild the republican party? right, i think the general feeling in the press coverage that liberals do. i'm just not sure they do. the question is, should you want these strong republican party? whatever that means. or should you want complete total unilateral victory. >> don't you think it depends on where your interests lie. on the one hand, it's clearly in the interest of the democratic party to see the republicans continue to margealize themselves and implode and fight the civil war. the country is ingovernable, right? like we kind of lurch from manufactured crisis to manufactured crisis because we have this rumpf that will not agree to any kind of government.

in as much as you want a two-part system, you want both of those to have a baseline of santi. >> any party's degree of self-criticism. that's what democrats accuse republicans these days of not having. any party has tendencies which need to be tempered. anybody that's concerned with the state of the nation the way it's supposed to be run is a good thing. i think as a democrat myself -- >> of fairly recent vintage. >> always vintage. just a cranky democrat. >> you're back in the fold, dude. >> i'm back in the saddle. and i think identity politics is great when it starts, but then i think it sinks and in becomes a poison. i think there needs to be a party that can temper that. i think that all of us can often have a visceral distrust of business and corporations. i'm always happy when there's a party that counters that.

however it has to be a republican party that is a conservative party, rather than what it actually is, which is today, in many senses, a radical party that makes gestures towards what any thinking party would call conservatism. >> i'm old enough to remember 1992. 12 years of republican presidents in the white house. every article in "newsweek" was the irrelevance of the democratic party. the real question is not whether the republican party will survive, but what will be the policy platform of the republican party? will the republican party move to the left to accommodate a new liberal majority? or stay conservative and expand to groups that aren't voting republican today? that's really the question of what will happen with the republican party, not whether it will survive. >> i think you're right. the republican party is going to survive. unfortunately, we have an electoral system that's designed to to have these two parties. >> yeah, agreed. >> as a progressive, and not as

a democrat, i definitely hope the republican party gets its act together. because the democratic party say mess right now. and it is a mess because it exists as we're -- its platform is, we're not as bad as those guys. and until the republicans become a lot better, the democratic party will not become a lot better. and to give you an example of this -- >> what does better mean? >> how does -- the democratic party say mess compared to what? it seems to be in better shape than -- >> only lectelectri electorally. >> the d.o.c., they're not getting any more. the party is essentially more liberal than it's been in anytime. in what way -- it's a mess

compared to -- >> what president obama does on the keystone pipeline. we'll see what president obama does on the decision of medicare and medicaid. we'll see whether the democratic is the party of roosevelt or stands on core principles. >> wait a second -- >> and a better republican party gives that credit. >> i totally -- i think i disagree. disagree contingent on what the definition of "better" is, right? is better a more effective party, more effective, can squeeze out more efficiency out of its current coalition? look at the texas republican party. >> they produced ted cruz. >> they produced ted cruz and they've done better in some elections. it's oh, i don't wanna. >> "better" say party that would attract more interest among young people. and i'm going to say more interest among critically thinking people who try to think out of the box because at this

point, what's going on is that the party say radical party. which to a large extent is in the hands of people looking to outside authorities, such as, for example, religion or os sa fied theorys that aren't based on what actually works but based on a religious ooh ooh ooh fervor. this is not the party of burke. i was teaching burke at columbia this week. my key question to the students is, you've read burke, conservatism. you thought you weren't going to like him. yet most of you hate republicans. what's the difference? >> wait a second -- >> i'm a great admirer of burke. i understand what you're talking about. i think part of the modern challenges of the movement in america was forged in the 1960s, before the great society. so there needs to be a reassessment of how you apply conservative principles to the 21st century. that philosophical is ongoing

on. >> the author of the great director of mind. if he's watching, he's losing his mind because i think the whole persuasion of burke, burke is a radical calling your revolution. monar monarchist revolution. his whole point we liberals consider a have this argument, it was good conservatism back in the day. >> burke was in dialogue -- >> exactly, the ones who are no longer in power. i want to talk about that right after this break.

hey, it's me, progressive insurance. you know, from our 4,000 television commercials. yep, there i am with flo. hoo-hoo! watch it! [chuckles] anyhoo, 3 million people switched to me last year, saving an average of $475. [sigh] it feels good to help people save... with great discounts like safe driver, multicar, and multipolicy. so call me today. you'll be glad you did. cannonbox! [splash!] there's this kind of liberal fielding that today's conser conservatives are not that bad. to the same time we have empirical voting methods in the house. you actually see the parties move to the right. i don't think that's that

deniable. >> let me take a piece of that. to me, this say fascinating thing. the republican party was a diverse party and a party that had many ideological streams within. forced the republican a lot of ways. civil rights. john lindsey and a group of republican's. >> goldwater -- >> no, before. kennedy. the first civil rights put forward with getting a chance to get some place, republicans were very involved on it. but my point is if you look back at the history of the republican party it's had conservative streams in it for a long time. conservative leaders historically called out the nuts. william f. buckley went on the front page of "national review" and called out the burkiers.

and reagan called out the nuts. >> you were not writing that about reagan in 1994 -- >> when reagan was there. >> no, but -- >> you know what's amazing, we're already doing this about george w. bush. >> i know. >> well, george w. bush was -- >> but do we not accept then, that is the generation of the republican party which we should be concerned about? >> yes. but i also think it's important to not fall into the temptation of then kind of putting reagan on a pedestal. >> so, i'm a little devil's advocate here. talk about me and my evolution, such as it was. it was more -- >> you're the founder of the cranky party. >> society evolved around me. which is when george w. bush came in and i wrote a book, i had many wonderful people

telling me i was really a republican who didn't want to admit it. i would openly admit for a year and a half, i considered it. i tried to to be open minded in everything. it made sense to the gestures towards conservatism. frankly, i think welfare reform was a wonderful thing. however, what's happening over the past ten years, in particular, no me could possibly consider becoming republican, and no more young people. >> you're right about the republican party losing its moderate wing and gesture towards capacity, and it has absorbed the saluatory

tradition. obama does have respect for families, institution, all these kinds of things. but the identity politics that you're docking about, although the modern democratic party is a coalition of these different groups, you don't see any kind of of the ridiculous -- you know, this isn't the party that's going to support ebonnics. >> i want to get to the idea of reagan and buckley calls out the nuts. one of the structural things about the conservative movement today, it's leaderless. there isn't any one person who has the stature today, since reagan died, basically, or since buckley leave the scene who has that kind of stature to say here's what conservatism should stand for. here are things that conservatism should not. if there becomes a conservative bearer over the next few years that could change. >> george w. bush was that. let's be clear.

>> let me ask you -- >> there were a lot of conservatives, on this issue of compassion. conservatives are already compassionate. >> let's be clear about this, this is revisionist history. conservatives loved george w. bush. >> i loved george w. bush. >> everyone wants to talk about when they became anti-fascist, right? paul ryan cast the deciding vote in medicare part "d" which i will never get tired of saying. bush was a conservative, if you criticized that -- >> that is not true. in early 2000, he actually was moderate. >> that's my point, after 2000 -- >> he wasn't a leader of the intellectual -- >> no. >> but the intellectual -- we could go back and find some embarrassing floral, purple hints of the conservative

hints -- >> controller go find -- >> let me ask you a question, you said didn't have the leaders. when buckley called out the john birch, he became conservative and said i am not this. i think the crisis in the republican party today is that there are not people standing up and taking the risks. >> i want you to think that ted cruz is the problem with the conservatives. >> well, what he's saying harvard is the seed bed of communism. >> hold off. i want to play the president making his argument for loyal opposition. the republican party getting its act together to be an effective counterbalancing force that works to govern the country, right? there's this question of sort of purging of the nuts which is a term i don't really love.

but about people that we think are extremists or stand in the way of actual functioning, practical politics, right? the exchange. but the thing to me, as someone who is to the left. pretty far to the left of the american mainstream politics, what investment do i have in getting that worked out? the question is, do i want a republican party that, fringeor instance, comes to the table on climate? that's what i want. right after this break. [ rosa ] i'm rosa and i quit smoking with chantix. when the doctor told me that i could smoke for the first week... i'm like...yeah, ok...

little did i know that one week later i wasn't smoking. [ male announcer ] along with support, chantix is proven to help people quit smoking. it reduces the urge to smoke. some people had changes in behavior, thinking or mood, hostility, agitation, depressed mood and suicidal thoughts or actions while taking or after stopping chantix. if you notice any of these stop taking chantix and call your doctor right away. tell your doctor about any history of depression or other mental health problems, which could get worse while taking chantix. don't take chantix if you've had a serious allergic or skin reaction to it. if you develop these stop taking chantix and see your doctor right away as some can be life-threatening. if you have a history of heart or blood vessel problems, tell your doctor if you have new or worse symptoms. get medical help right away if you have symptoms of a heart attack. use caution when driving or operating machinery. common side effects include nausea, trouble sleeping and unusual dreams. it helps to have people around you... they say, you're much bigger than this. and you are. [ male announcer ] ask your doctor if chantix is right for you. plays a key role throughout our lives. one a day men's 50+ is a complete multivitamin

designed for men's health concerns as we age. it has 7 antioxidants to support cell health. one a day men's 50+. [ slap! ] [ male announcer ] your favorite foods fighting you? fight back fast with tums. calcium-rich tums starts working so fast you'll forget you had heartburn. ♪ tum tum tum tum tums you'll forget you had heartburn. try running four.ning a restaurant is hard, fortunately we've got ink. it gives us 5x the rewards on our internet, phone charges and cable, plus at office supply stores. rewards we put right back into our business. this is the only thing we've ever wanted to do and ink helps us do it. make your mark with ink from chase. a hairline fracture to the mandible and contusions to the metacarpus. what do you see?

um, i see a duck. be more specific. i see the aflac duck. i see the aflac duck out of work and not making any money. i see him moving in with his parents and selling bootleg dvds out of the back of a van. dude, that's your life. remember, aflac will give him cash to help cover his rent, car payments and keep everything as normal as possible. i see lunch. [ monitor beeping ] let's move on. [ male announcer ] find out what a hospital stay could really cost you at aflac.com. i'm a big believer not just in the value of a loyal opposition, but in its necessity. having differences of opinion, having a real debate about matters of domestic policy and national security, that's not something that's only good for our country. it's absolutely essential. it's only through the process of disagreement and debate that bad ideas get tossed out. and good ideas get refined and made better.

and that kind of vigorous back and forth, though imperfect and well-founded process that it is is at the heart of our democracy. >> that's the president when he went to address the republican house ideas conference. that famous interchange is an amazing moment that will never happen again, because it was so great. and it was sort of like, you know, "up with chris hayes" people of actual power. >> president obama is exactly who he wants to be. >> right. that's who president obama wants to be. >> one, "a," i think this model of strong and vigorous debate, obviously, i believe in that. that's what i try to do that here. that's what i do for a living. politics to me seems like i'm a realist on this. pure will to power. i'm not quite sure these exchanges ever -- like, do we have some idea that these exchanges back and forth improve things. and i'm not sure how much that's ever the case.

but the other question is like how do we get -- like on climate, for instance. josh bearer had this column he was talking about why he's a republican, right. he made a distinction between different parties are good because of values. different conceptions are good, different values, moral codes of what should be valued, you know. but we should agree on positive factsing right? we should say -- >> change is real. >> exactly. now, you have a set of enor enormative principles that you want to deal with. it does feel that the problems we want to encounter are on questions of fact, right? there's disengagement from that. and i don't know what changes that. >> the only thing that changes you basically have a party that's obstructed that reality and now lives within it. there's been a hope for a long time that that bubble is going

to burst. but you have to see, i think, the current republican party real crumble, really suffer several more years of serious electoral defeats before you're going have some kind of reckoning with the intellectual cul-de-sac. >> i don't think it's going to happen. here's the other thing. you know what the midterm electorate is going to look like in 2014? like the 2010. >> smaller, older and white. and going to legislate a lot of republicans we'll be sitting at this table writing articles. >> i can tell you that's not true. >> really? >> yeah, i think 2010 was like that. in 2010 -- in 2008, after obama won, people had all the same conversations they're having today. then 2010 happened, conservatism is fine. doesn't need to change. 2008 made people realize that the 2010 change is has been an that the electorate has a much more urgency to how to improve and modernize.

that's happening. >> go ahead. >> you've come full circle, though. you started out why should progressives care about this. >> right. >> the fact of the matter is, until the republican party becomes -- >> right. >> i use the term "better" until it becomes better at what it does. the democratic party will always have a huge space in which which to compromise. for progressives, they should want the republican party to become an intellectual vigorous and strong conservative party from a reality-based point. >> what do we know now that we didn't know last week? my answer after this.

in just a moment.

a quick correction for an error i made on another show. on friday, february 15th, i appeared on the rachel mad do you show. one of those tactics is divestments in which advocates call for stocks. on the california public employment retirement system as having divested from gun manufacturers when in fact it was the california state teachers retirement system that was the first major pension fund to divest from firearms manufacturers. as a coda, it turns out a few days after i appeared on rachel's show, calprs voted to divest from two gun manufacturers as well. so you can also view my error as a brief moment of claryovance. christine quinn has, after 1,000 days, not brought to vote a bill that would require all businesses in the city to give

their employees five paid sick days a year. this week, gloria steinem signed a letter along with hundreds of other women that ran an ad in the "new york times" calling for miss quinn to bring sick pay day legislation up for vote. if elected, she would be the first out gay mayor of new york. but miss steinem says making life fair for women seems more important than breaking the barrier for one one. we now know china has done what the u.s. has not, put a tax on carbon. on tuesday, the official state newspaper announced that quote, china will proactively introduce a set of new taxation policies designed to preserve the environment including a tax on carbon dioxide emissions according to a senior official at the ministry of finance. we don't know when the tax will kick in, how high it will be or how strictly it will be

enforced. we know there are reasons to be quite skeptical of china's commitment to reducing emissions but we know chinese authorities are increasingly concerned about climate change and directing more investment toward renewable energy. we know public investment in renewable energy in if u.the u. on the decline. we know the citizens of a houston suburb, missouri city, better be towaready to pay up w they need the services of the local police. starting march 1st, drivers will be charged the cost of dispatching first responders to the scene of car crashes, a tab that can run as high as $2,000. we know city officials say the new policy is intended to close the city's budgets deficit and will save $50,000 a year. we know the model of goods purchased is the inevitable result of the austerity regime and is an offense against the most foundational conceit of our social contract which is that we all pay in to provide basic service, universal services we all might use some day. we know that increasingly the

disaggregate funding with means testing, the only durable goods are those we pay for and use collectively. finally, we know the new name for the florida atlantic university's football stadium. the school in boca raton saw a sponsor for the stadium in exchange for naming rights. on tuesday we learned for the price of $6 million, the new name of the stadium will be geo group stadium. geo group is one of the nation's largest operators of for-profit prisons. we know geo facilities have faced lawsuits and accusations of human rights abuses. we know in the last decade the industry has boomed with the top two private prisons both enjoying record profits topping $1.6 billion in revenue last year. we know nothing makes a mockery of the notion of a free market like booming magnates of the prison industrial complex who exist solely off government contracts and then turn around and use their money and influence to push policy makers to put more people in prison. even the staunchest conservative will tell you the invisible hand is supposed to be an instrument of liberation, not imprisonment.

want to find out what my guests know they didn't when the week began. john? >> from 1937 to 1963, there was a gridlocked congress. people were as appalled at the state of lawmaking as we are now and what broke it was a gradual groundswell of social related feeling which we now know as the civil rights act of 1964. that was created by uniquely politically talented president who got in for accidental reports. not sure what the lessons are for today. however, congress has been worse than it is now and i think it's something we could remember. >> after the affordable care act is fully implemented there will still be 30 million americans without health insurance. the former director of the congressional budget office in the bush administration put out an op-ed in reuters making the case for market based universal coverage as the way forward for entitlement reform. this is the beginning of a multi-year project to try to make the case to conservatives that universal coverage is the path to getting our fiscal ship

in balance. >> michelle? >> you know, most weeks seem to bring at least some news about why the catholic church has no business setting itself up as the kind of moral arbiter of american politics or any other kind of politics. this week we learned from the pope's resignation might be related to a circle of high level gay clergy being blackmailed by male prostitutes. >> i saw that report and i spent time in italy. not sure how much i trust the sourcing on that but i did see that report. john? >> one thing we know is that the sequester is austerity, is kind of across the board blunt austerity but the austerity that erskine bowles and alan simpson want which is ultimately much more devastating going after social security, medicare, medicaid, is being pushed by a group called fix the debt.

they're spending literally tens of millions of dollars to advance the idea that this is the only alternative. the terrific group center for media and democracy has launched a new website at prwatch.org that tells you all about this group and what's revealed is that it's being run by a lot of billionaires who don't want to fix the debt. they really want to lower their taxes. >> nation magazine has a great feature on fix the debt this week. check that out. my thanks to my guests. thank you for getting up. thank you for joining us today. join us tomorrow, sunday morning at 8:00. we'll have robert gibbs on the president and the white house press corps. next, melissa harris-perry. today, how president obama compares to kevin bacon in "footloose." that and a once great american city's on life support. will america let detroit die? see you here tomorrow at 8:00. ♪

[ slap! ] [ male announcer ] your favorite foods fighting you? fight back fast with tums. calcium-rich tums starts working so fast you'll forget you had heartburn. ♪ tum tum tum tum tums you'll forget you had heartburn. when you lost the thing you can't believe you lost.. when what you just bought, just broke. or when you have a little trouble a long way from home... as an american express cardmember you can expect some help. but what you might not expect,

is you can get all this with a prepaid card. spends like cash. feels like membership. i've always had to keep my eye on her... but, i didn't always watch out for myself. with so much noise about health care... i tuned it all out. with unitedhealthcare, i get information that matters... my individual health profile. not random statistics. they even reward me for addressing my health risks. so i'm doing fine... but she's still going to give me a heart attack. we're more than 78,000 people looking out for more than 70 million americans. that's health in numbers. unitedhealthcare.

[ male announcer ] the rhythm of life. [ whistle blowing ] where do you hear that beat? campbell's healthy request soup lets you hear it... in your heart. [ basketball bouncing ] heart healthy. great taste. mmm... [ male announcer ] sounds good. it's amazing what soup can do.